The Belfast City Council has unanimously designated the building at 333 High St. as dangerous, giving the city authority to intervene and recover its expenses if the owner fails to bring the property into compliance with a court judgment and settlement agreement.
The decision does not trigger immediate demolition. City officials will continue working with owner James Constable and engineer Jeffrey Kingsbury on rehabilitation, while retaining the ability to secure the building, correct dangerous conditions or have the structure demolished if the agreement’s requirements are not met.
The vote followed a presentation and public hearing that brought years of enforcement history before the council, along with Constable’s insistence that the building can be saved and Kingsbury’s assessment that it is ready for additional work.
Councilor Neal Harkness described the decision as a demand for completion, while expressing a preference for rehabilitation.
“What we’re saying here is, ‘get it done,’” Harkness said. “If not, eventually we’ll have to do something about it.”
He added that councilors would “really like to see the house [rehabilitated] and not torn down.”
For the city, the designation establishes a way to enforce the property’s repair obligations and recover public money spent addressing its condition. For Constable, it leaves a route to rehabilitation, but with the possibility of city intervention if that effort fails.
Under the settlement, Belfast must give Constable a 30-day notice before exercising its authority to demolish the structure. The rehabilitation process also requires proper permits, appropriate financing and a qualified contractor acceptable to the city.
Constable told councilors he is working with Kingsbury and other contractors to bring the property into compliance.
“It’s a house we’ve gone to significant lengths to save,” he said.
Constable maintained that the building can be restored and challenged the characterization of its current condition.
“We intend to do so,” he said of saving the house, adding, “it is not a dangerous building.”
Kingsbury offered a more qualified assessment. Although the structure was “not ready for occupancy,” he does not consider it unsafe to work in.
“It’s ready for the remaining work to be done,” Kingsbury told the council.
Those statements underscored a distinction running through the hearing: Whether the building can be rehabilitated is a different question from whether it presently meets the requirements for safe residential occupancy. The council’s designation allows the city to enforce those requirements while repair efforts continue.
The property’s enforcement history stretches back several years. According to City Manager Erin Herbig’s report, the building served as the New Covenant Apostolic Church from 2002 until its sale in 2010. Constable purchased it in 2011 through 333 High Street LLC.
City officials described the structure as primarily empty and inadequately maintained over the ensuing years, apart from an electrical service upgrade and some exterior work. They also identified work undertaken without required permits or inspections.
Code Enforcement Officer Stephen Wilson issued a violation notice in 2022 concerning exterior property maintenance. Subsequent inspections and correspondence expanded the city’s concerns to include structural conditions and unpermitted electrical work.
An engineering report dated April 3, 2024, identified foundation and drainage problems, inadequate ventilation, dry rot in timbers, insufficient structural support and mold. The report described the home as a “significant life safety hazard to occupants” and recommended development and implementation of a comprehensive structural repair or replacement plan.
On Feb. 4, 2025, the council authorized court enforcement proceedings seeking to have the building brought into a safe condition or demolished.
An April 2, 2026, District Court judgment found the structure unsafe, unsanitary and unfit for human occupancy. The court’s findings described progressive deterioration, failing structural members, bowed walls, water intrusion, unsafe wiring, deteriorating porches and steps, and missing essential utility services.
The judgment acknowledged Constable’s repair efforts, including a new foundation costing approximately $45,000, but concluded that those improvements addressed only part of the building’s deficiencies. Engineering testimony recounted in the judgment estimated that approximately 70% to 85% of the structure would require replacement.
The court ordered Constable to finish work covered by an existing permit by June 30, 2026, and obtain the permits needed for the remaining remediation by Aug. 31. It required completion of compliance work within two years of permit issuance, with diligent progress during that period.
Occupancy remains prohibited until the code enforcement officer issues a certificate of occupancy.
The judgment also assessed $144,000 in civil penalties and awarded the city legal fees and costs. Constable appealed, and the parties subsequently reached a July 23 settlement under which he agreed to continue bringing the property into compliance and dismiss the appeal.
The settlement offers a substantial financial incentive to finish the work: the city will waive the court-ordered fines once the code enforcement officer certifies compliance. Constable also agreed to pay $20,000 in legal fees incurred to that point, plus additional legal expenses incurred until compliance is confirmed.
City staff reported before the October meeting that Constable had failed to obtain all necessary permits by Aug. 31 and was therefore in violation of both the judgment and settlement.
The council’s action adds the municipal dangerous-building designation to that enforcement framework. Although the court found serious safety and property-maintenance violations, it did not adjudicate the city’s separate statutory dangerous-building claim, determining that such a claim would need to be heard in Superior Court.
At the hearing, city attorney Kristin Collins said Constable had already agreed to the council’s entry of the order through the settlement.
“The dangerous building order has already been stipulated to,” Collins told councilors. “[Constable] won’t appeal the entry of this order.”
That agreement concerns the legal order, even as Constable continues to dispute whether the building’s present physical condition warrants the dangerous-building description.
In a Sept. 30 submission included in the council materials, Constable asserted that more than $100,000 in structural remediation had been undertaken under a licensed Maine engineer’s oversight. He cited chimney removal, structural work, recent inspection approvals and electrical work he described as approximately 90% complete.
Those assertions presented his account of progress since the court proceedings. They did not establish that all required work, permits and approvals had been completed.
Wilson explained to councilors that the designation allows Belfast to recover expenses if the city ultimately must address the building itself.
Under the order, city expenses must be repaid within 30 days after a demand for payment. Otherwise, the city may assess a special tax against the property. Recoverable expenses can include securing the structure, correcting dangerous conditions, demolition and removal, and related legal and administrative costs.
No immediate demolition date was announced. The code office will continue working with Constable and Kingsbury to oversee the building’s return to compliance.
The council’s unanimous vote leaves rehabilitation as the preferred outcome, backed by an enforceable alternative if the owner does not complete the required work. As Harkness’ remarks made clear, councilors want the house repaired, and expect the effort to produce a safe, compliant building.
This story appears through a media partnership with Midcoast Villager.